Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

oag.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 480 posts

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#41

Post by jessriedel »

_AzMoo wrote: post #26
sfmike wrote: post #15

We could learn from for example Japan where there is no cents and all fees included so 5000 Yen is 5000 yen no tip no tax no fees no cents it's really cortisol reducing.

Aside from the cents bit, it's like that in Australia too. If something (retail) says $30 then it's $30. If it says $30.95 then it's $30.95. It's very simple. When you're selling wholesale it's different because it's a sales tax, and that's paid by the consumer, not the retail business.

Sales tax is paid by the consumer? The consumer mails in a check for the sales tax to the government?

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#42

Post by musicale »

Beldin wrote: post #21
cmeacham98 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you been to a sit-down restaurant recently? Where I live (major southeast US city) there's a 50/50 chance there will be some random bullshit fee (sometimes even more than one!) tacked onto the bill (and I'm not talking about tax or a tip).

Taxes are (should be) completely predictable. There's no reason not to include them in the price. So those definitely constitute bs fees.

Given that they compute the tax on your receipt, they could compute the tax up front unless it depends on delivery location - which they need to ask for anyway.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#43

Post by nodesocket »

Laws like this aren't going to make services and products any cheaper. They'll just shift around and hide the fees into the core price. Sure, that's better I suppose, but end of the day still costs the same amount. Not convinced at all this is a area policy makers should be focusing on.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#45

Post by cmeacham98 »

Beldin wrote: post #21
cmeacham98 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you been to a sit-down restaurant recently? Where I live (major southeast US city) there's a 50/50 chance there will be some random bullshit fee (sometimes even more than one!) tacked onto the bill (and I'm not talking about tax or a tip).

Taxes are (should be) completely predictable. There's no reason not to include them in the price. So those definitely constitute bs fees.

I agree it would be ideal if taxes were displayed in the price, but they are a known constant easily accounted for.

The types of fees I'm referring to are included at the bottom of the menu in 2pt font. You're typically already halfway through ordering before discovering that you'll randomly be charged an extra 20% because the restaurant relies on misleading consumers about their prices to draw them in.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#46

Post by rahimnathwani »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #29
adasdasdas wrote: post #7

I don't know why we can't just force everyone to show post tax/fees price upfront. It's complete bullshit that every restaurant bill comes with 3 different taxes.

I disagree. Note the California bill specifically exempts taxes from this "upfront pricing" requirement. The reason I think listing taxes separately is OK is because (a) it is not something that the business itself has any choice over, and (b) all businesses have to tax the same for equivalent services. I think listing the taxes separately serves an important purpose to remind the purchaser about where your payments…

  but I will say that restaurants I've been to always highlight any mandatory fees besides normal sales tax on the menu
In San Francisco, restaurants rarely highlight the fees. They are usually in smaller font at the bottom of the menu (and maybe only on one side of a double-sided menu) and sometimes not discoverable until you get the bill.

Here's a typical example (click on 'menu'): https://maps.app.goo.gl/XS3puQEttQVtTW1FA

Tartine hides the 5% surcharge at the bottom of the menu in smaller font. It's also one of three bullets: the first and third are about food safety.

What's the rationale for putting the surcharge bullet in between the two food safety bullets?

Also: if you order online from Tartine, you won't see the surcharge until you go to check out. And if you order from one of the handwritten 'daily specials' signs, you won't see the surcharge until you pay.

(Using Tartine as an example. It's not unique.)

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#47

Post by Doctor_Fegg »

xmprt wrote: post #31
adasdasdas wrote: post #7

I don't know why we can't just force everyone to show post tax/fees price upfront. It's complete bullshit that every restaurant bill comes with 3 different taxes.

Taxes are set at a multiple levels (federal, state, district, and city) so it's pretty much impossible to show the post tax price on the label. Hidden fees are a completely different issue.

I never understand this argument at all. Your shops have computers with label printers, right?

At the Co-op supermarket in our little UK town (population 3000) they’ve even just replaced the shelf price tickets with tiny colour displays.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#48

Post by smt88 »

sfmike wrote: post #15

We could learn from for example Japan where there is no cents and all fees included so 5000 Yen is 5000 yen no tip no tax no fees no cents it's really cortisol reducing.

Including taxes in the sticker price is bad. It allows the government to quietly increase taxes without people noticing.

Sales taxes are in general regressive and harm lower-income people the most, so they should be visible and attributable to government.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#49

Post by watwut »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #29
adasdasdas wrote: post #7

I don't know why we can't just force everyone to show post tax/fees price upfront. It's complete bullshit that every restaurant bill comes with 3 different taxes.

I disagree. Note the California bill specifically exempts taxes from this "upfront pricing" requirement. The reason I think listing taxes separately is OK is because (a) it is not something that the business itself has any choice over, and (b) all businesses have to tax the same for equivalent services. I think listing the taxes separately serves an important purpose to remind the purchaser about where your payments…

It is not about reminding, it is about making final total price harder to see.

You can list post tax price and then write components if you so please. But showing price without tax is just attempt to look cheaper.

Re: Bill to ban hidden fees in California signed into law

#50

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

Comments that are bringing up taxes (which are totally exempted by this bill anyway) and tips (with one small caveat) are completely missing the point.

You can have a debate about how to display those items on a price list, but everyone knows about them and they are expected. The whole point of this bill is to prevent bait-and-switch, where loads of unknown or variable fees are tacked on after the price is initially shown.

The one caveat I'd say about a tip is if it's mandatory. E.g. if a place requires a minimum tip amount for large parties, it's no longer a tip, it's appropriately called a service charge.

Post reply on HN